Ready to fight back?

Sign up for Take Action Now and we’ll send you three meaningful actions every Tuesday.

Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue.

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

Support Progressive Journalism

The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.

Fight Back!

Sign up for Take Action Now and we’ll send you three meaningful actions you can take each week.

Travel With The Nation

Be the first to hear about Nation Travels destinations, and explore the world with kindred spirits.

Sign up for our Wine Club today.

Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?

The tax bill Senate Republicans rushed to pass in the dark of night, unread by most senators, was a Hail Mary pass by a party that expects to lose seats in the coming midterms, and knows that its historically unpopular president has a good chance of serving only one term. It was an act of legislative looting by a party that’s behind by an average of eight points in generic congressional ballot polls, doesn’t think it will enjoy unified control of government again in the immediate future, and is grabbing whatever benefits it can for its donors while teeing up deep, damaging cuts to the safety net in the future.

The conventional wisdom holds that Republicans pursued a maximalist approach to the bill because they faced a donors’ revolt if they didn’t deliver something big after Obamacare repeal turned into a debacle, and because they’re insulated to a degree from the wrath of the voters.

This is true. As a result of a combination of gerrymandering and the inefficient distribution of Democratic voters, the GOP might be able to hold on to control of the House despite losing the popular vote by as much as seven or eight points. Next year, Republicans will defend only nine Senate seats, many of them in solidly red states, while their opponents try to hold 25. And conservative donors have threatened to close their wallets if they don’t get big cuts.

But those factors alone don’t explain congressional leaders’ apparent contempt for public opinion. Looking at the bigger picture suggests that they’ve internalized the “emerging Democratic majority” thesis: They know that the electorate is becoming more diverse, more urban, and better educated. They understand that their core demographic—married whites who identify as Christians—is in rapid decline. This is what animates their relentless efforts to suppress the vote of typically Democratic constituencies, and it explains their rush to pass a massive rewrite of the tax code that’s historically unpopular.

Related Article

As The Atlantic’s Ronald Brownstein noted on Twitter, the Senate bill will come down especially hard on the Dems’ rising coalition: “urban residents, blue states, college and graduate students.… It’s an enemies list as much as a revenue bill.”

Republicans understand that their last two presidents entered office despite losing the popular vote, as they’ve now done in six of the past seven presidential contests dating back to 1988. They get that Donald Trump’s approval ratings are historically low for this stage in a presidency, and that today’s intense partisanship makes it unlikely that he’ll ever enjoy anything even approaching majority support. They know that he’s going to lead them into a 2020 contest in which the Senate map favors the Democrats. And of course they know that Robert Mueller’s investigation is looming over all of this.

2

3

4

5

They know a backlash is coming, and they’re making the most of the power they have while they still can. They don’t care about public perception if it’s an obstacle to enacting long-term cuts to taxes and spending that will be difficult for future Congresses to reverse.

Current Issue

It’s difficult to overstate how destructive this bill will be over the long term, and impossible to overstate the degree to which their shambolic, one-party legislative process was an affront to the most basic norms of democratic governance.

In order to finance a portion of the $1.4 trillion in tax cuts they’re showering on corporate America over the next 10 years, they eliminate the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) individual mandate. According to the Congressional Budget Office, this would lead to 4 million Americans’ losing their coverage next year, and 13 million fewer insured in 2027. As healthy people leave the pool, premiums for everyone else in the ACA’s exchanges would spike by 10 percent.

That’s only the beginning. As Amy Goldstein reports for The Washington Post, the bill would have “potent ripple effects” throughout the health-care system. As a result of an existing “pay as you go” law, rising deficits will make automatic budget cuts kick in, unless Congress steps in to stop them, that would reduce funding for Medicare by $25 billion per year. And it’s not just health care—Margot Sanger-Katz reported for The New York Times that if this bill becomes law “the funding for dozens of federal spending programs could be cut—in many cases to nothing—beginning next year.”

Republican senators blithely dismiss this reality, insisting that the bill would unleash sufficient growth to pay for itself. “I’m totally confident this is a revenue-neutral bill,” said Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). “I think it’s going to be a revenue producer.” This is something like confidently stating a belief in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus.

Congress’s own Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the bill will drive up deficits by $1 trillion over the next decade. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin promised that his staff would produce an analysis that would support Republican claims that the bill would pay for itself—he said that he had 100 people working on it—but it was never released. The agency’s inspector general is now investigating to determine whether he spiked the analysis because it contradicted his talking points. House majority leader Paul Ryan (R-WI) touted a letter signed by a number of economists who supposedly supported the House bill, but Lee Fang reported for The Intercept that it included signatures by people who don’t exist or who say they never signed anything of the sort, as well as “office assistants, ex-felons and a sprinkling of real economists.” Meanwhile, a survey of 38 academic economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Initiative on Global Markets found that 37 of them expect the bill to blow up federal deficits, and the 38th “misread the question,” according to The Washington Post.

Given all of that, it should come as no surprise that Republicans didn’t want their sausage making to see the light of day until shortly before the vote. Open hearings, expert testimony, and public discussion of the bill’s provisions were the last thing Mitch McConnell and his colleagues wanted to see.

The process and product are inseparable: It isn’t a bad bill because it was crafted by a small group within the Republican leadership and passed without an opportunity for the public to digest its provisions. They jammed it through because they knew that if it went through anything resembling the Senate’s regular order, it would trigger significant public opposition.

And the truly maddening part is that when Democrats do regain power they typically try to revive the institutional norms that Republicans ignored. They don’t feel that they’re facing demographic headwinds and have to pursue a maximalist agenda. So they hold dozens of hearings and markups on their legislation, and their opponents still claim that it’s being shoved down their throats. See: The Affordable Care Act.

The game is transparent: Republicans claim, despite all evidence to the contrary, that tax cuts will pay for themselves, and when those cuts result in huge deficits, they use them as leverage to force Democrats to accept new spending cuts. That’s precisely what happened under Obama after George W. Bush’s tax cuts blew a giant hole in the federal budget. Lather, rinse, repeat.

But this fight is not over. The House and Senate still need to reconcile their respective bills, and resistance groups are focusing especially on the House, where everyone’s up for reelection in 2018 and the divide between the hardcore members of the “Freedom Caucus” and more pragmatic members may imperil final passage. It’s still worth contacting your representatives.

Anyone here think the next conservative GOP plan to "save" America will be the sacking of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?

How about a little farther in the future when they put into action their previously prefabricated decision the American people are too materially satiated and that the standard of living is too high for us to compete with Asia? Next thing you know, once the resistance is crushed, if they get that far, Americans will be reduced to something more along the lines of Mexico--where shamelessly wealthy people are surrounded by abysmally poor people desperate for even pennies.

It's time to speak truth to power like never before. The only ones they're "saving" with their long term designs are the ones who have been hoarding money for several decades.

(26)(2)

S Wojciech Sokolowskisays:

December 4, 2017 at 4:46 pm

Even if the numbers are right and Democrats manage to see the halls of power in DC again, the chances are they will pull an Obama and a Clinton. They will do nothing to reverse the Republican tax cuts, they will try to "save" social security by cutting the benefits, and they will viciously attack the left for being "unrealistic". Following Republican "thought leaders" is what the Democrats have been doing for the past 30 or so years, and there is no reason to believe this will change in the foreseeable future.

(20)(7)

Charles Jacobysays:

December 5, 2017 at 7:32 pm

Well, it's not only Republicans who rob the Treasury, which is why the two parties are so often referred to as one party. Personally, I regard this one party as a party of tyranny. Yes, it's a subtle tyranny, but a tyranny nonetheless.

One expects reactionaries to do what they do, while one does NOT expect proclaimed "progressives" to do the same. If the Republican Party is the party of sheer greed, the Democratic Party is one of sheer fraud. As Holland notes, much of the destruction is due to gerrymandering--a crime if ever there were one--and then the Electoral College, the intent of which is to prevent the prevalence of democracy--you know, lest the people get out of hand and start to think for themselves as to how they're being blindly mugged.

(7)(3)

Bette Andresensays:

December 4, 2017 at 5:37 pm

Amen! S Wojciech Sokolowski, you are right on target. Anyone expecting the Democrats to help the people is living in Fantasyland. The goal of both parties is to, basically, get rid of government, the nation/state, so we can all live under corporate rule. The WTO? The trade agreements with the ISDS. All our laws are up for grabs and they can't even be litigated in our courts. A corporate tribunal will decide and their decision will be binding. And who went after, and ultimately killed, Aaron Swartz? That was not Trump of the Republicans. It was Obama's so called "Justice" Department. Swartz's brilliance and effectiveness in saving the internet was a threat. The free and open internet is going down, and the powers that be will then have total control of information. It is not just a matter of getting rid of Trump. That's just a puppet show for us peons to watch. Look behind the scenes and see the Clintons and the Bush clan all holding hands and singing Kumbaya. (Not sure of spelling, but you know what I mean.)

(11)(13)

Michael Robertsonsays:

December 4, 2017 at 4:22 pm

I'll just state the obvious, which is what the mainstream media and mainstream Democrats won't say: today's Republican party is not a political party, in the sense that a valid political party has a vision for responsible governance that benefits the governed. It is a collection of sociopaths that have found common cause under the banner of a political party; it's agenda is the use of government to loot the economy for the benefit of the party members and its backers. There is no lie too brazen for these people, and when the tattered veneer of a democratic process is not enough to keep them in power, they will jettison that and turn this country into a banana republic with a tinpot dictator at the helm. These people are truly vile.

(41)(1)

Bette Andresensays:

December 4, 2017 at 5:41 pm

And the same holds true for the Democrats. It's just a game of good cop/bad cop and we all line up behind the one we think is the good cop. Forget it, they are on the same team, and it's not the one you are on.

(13)(20)

Barbara Pentonysays:

December 4, 2017 at 4:15 pm

What the GOP did and have been doing for 25 years is called the Two Santa Claus Theory.....

The Two Santa Claus Theory is a political theory and strategy published by Wanniski in 1976, which he promoted within the United States Republican Party. The theory states that in democratic elections, if Democrats appeal to voters by proposing programs to help people, then the Republicans cannot gain broader appeal by proposing less spending. The first "Santa Claus" of the theory title refers to the Democrats who promises programs to help the disadvantaged. The "Two Santa Claus Theory" recommends that the Republicans must assume the role of a second Santa Claus by not arguing to cut spending but by offering the option of cutting taxes.

According to Wanniski, the theory is simple. In 1976, he wrote that the Two-Santa Claus Theory suggests that "the Republicans should concentrate on tax-rate reduction. As they succeed in expanding incentives to produce, they will move the economy back to full employment and thereby reduce social pressures for public spending. Just as an increase in Government spending inevitably means taxes must be raised, a cut in tax rates—by expanding the private sector—will diminish the relative size of the public sector." Wanniski suggested this position, as Thom Hartmann has clarified, so that the Democrats would "have to be anti-Santas by raising taxes, or anti-Santas by cutting spending. Either one would lose them elections."

So, the GOP knows they will lose in 2018 and beyond so they are expecting Democrats to continue the theory....either cut spending and/or raise taxes. However, since deficits don't matter to the GOP, the Democrats should raise taxes significantly on those that have done spectacularly well for many years AND increase spending that will benefit the poor, working and middle classes.

(28)(0)

Ron Dickssays:

December 4, 2017 at 4:01 pm

....who’s going to stop them?....the democrats?...hold on while I stop laughing....

(6)(5)

S Wojciech Sokolowskisays:

December 4, 2017 at 4:49 pm

Democrats will finish the job of dismantling Medicare and Social Security - just as it took Nixon to mend ties with China. That's bipartisanship.

(6)(10)

Albert Berarduccisays:

December 4, 2017 at 10:31 am

All points hit center mass with this depressing but highly accurate thesis. It suggests that the plan needs not only to be flipping the House and/or Senate in 2018; but also, building on that ‘wave’ in the crucial election of 2020 (tax bill’s draconian effects will just be starting for people earning <$75K per year, and 2020 is the year of census-taking). A second successive ‘wave’ election result in favor of Liberal Dems, must achieve veto-proof majorities in US Senate & House that reaches into statehouse elections and state gubernatorial races (to neutralize & reverse rightward gerrymandering over the ensuing 10 + years) for the current, amoral Republican carnage to be reversed permanently. We have a lot of work to do in the next 3 years. Are Liberals and Progressives up to this daunting task? You gotta hope that we have that laser-like focus and energy to do this...and...that we stay vigilant to the counter attacks from the Right that will inevitably come. Resist smartly, win and prevail. Only the very survival of our cultural and economic democracies depends that on our being successful!

(24)(1)

Walter Pewensays:

December 4, 2017 at 12:21 pm

And that's roughly counter to what the Democrats did in the 1980's which opened the gates of hell for this. They normalized Reagan, and sat on their asses.

(17)(2)

Gordon Hilgerssays:

December 3, 2017 at 4:40 pm

Always sad when an entire political party becomes so infatuated with money that it completely loses touch with its supposed mission of representing all of the American people rather than a few exceptionally wealthy ones.

The way these conservative GOP airheads are running the table this time around, I'm waiting for them to turn the Statue of Liberty into a streetwalker and then pimp her just like James O'Keefe.

Meanwhile their low-information political-naif minions defend literally everything they do with the refrain: FREEDUMB!!!

You can tell them right to their faces that, no, money does not equal freedom, and that no, sacking the public weal in order to receive bribes (they call them "campaign donations") is not anything more than pure anti-Americanism, and guess what. They'll dub you a socialist because you gave them some lip.

If I were a Marxist, I'd be welcoming this development. As the conservative mass movement continues to dismantle social welfare programs that helped prevent communist revolutionary insurgency from fomenting revolution here; as they chip away at reforms directed at commercial organizations that also helped to keep capitalism at least halfway subordinate to the government as the leading entity here; and as they continue to attempt to delegitimate independent unions that took-away the IWW's collective bargaining hegemony in the early 20th Century...well, what's happening? They're opening the door to a future Marxist revolutionary insurgency. As if the last one wasn't weird enough.

Are the conservatives, who hate liberals, engaged in a secret pinkie swear with the Marxists--who also hate liberals?

Who knows, who cares, why bother? I simply want American democracy back. Whatever it takes to get us there.

(31)(1)

Francis Louis Szotsays:

December 3, 2017 at 9:52 am

FINALLY seeing the use of the correct accusatory tone
and meaning that should be applied to the workings of
the USA government.

“Looting” the treasury; a precise and accurate evaluation
of the latest legislative conspiracy to smash & grab for the
plutocratic sliver of the population.

Face it, Folks. This Kakocracy didn’t just begin with Trump,
and it’s not strictly a Republikkklann method.

Those Democrats who still fawn over Obama, or
Hillary–Billery Clinton, Biden, Pelosi, etc.; . . . your JUST as
clueless and robotic in your support as the Alabamians
who feel compelled to vote for a character like Roy Moore
because he has that “R” next to his name on the ballot.

(19)(20)

Walter Pewensays:

December 3, 2017 at 10:15 am

"Looting" is the concise word. As one example, every time a Republican gets the White House now they immediately dip into the Social Security Fund. They are like 16 year old sociopaths just beginning their career of theft. Hand into the 7-11 cash drawer. Immediately. No impulse control. Get in office by saying you are not going to do it then do it. As Sly Stone sang "It's A Family Affair." Sure is in this dysfunctional family we refer to as the "United States." Usually Junior continues all his life doing theft. And so it goes...

(28)(1)

Walter Pewensays:

December 2, 2017 at 7:11 pm

In roughly two years there will be the beginnings of a real depression. Not a recession. And not exactly like the 1930's. But a depression nonetheless. One class in freshman econ is all you need to figure it out. You cannot take this much money out of circulation without essentially collapsing the economy as we know it. Corporate is not keen on reinvestment. Why should they? They know that means actually paying people who are not professionals an actual wage. And they won't do it. As we saw in 08, the financial sector won't do it. And private individuals are simply going to hoard. Welcome. 1980 was always leading to this. Inevitably.